...the Keynesian economic theory deals with economic activity as the main economic health indicators, neoclassical actually focuses on economic potential growth and economic growth as health indicators

is that joke backwards or am i missing something?

Lol no?

1. You're wrong about Keynesian thought
2. Market liberalism dictates that all transactions are good transactions as they occur without 3rd party influence, so the joke got it right, I think it just went over your head.

@Yoyoyozo

well are wet talking about Keynesian economics or the actual economics of Keynes... because those are two different things.

for keynesian economics, the idea of circulation of wealth is pinnace to healthy economic activity. 40,000$ being traded in two even interactions is seen as a positive in keynesian economics, especially in regards to the original 1930s Hick's interpretation of Keynes (known as Keynsian economics)

and you're forgetting one basic principle of market liberalism, and that's that rational agents will interact in transactions only when it's good for them. so it would make sense for the neoclassical to either eat the shit for 20,000$, OR offer 20,000$ for the shit to be eaten: not both.

pinnacle* blehhhh

or are you talking about New Keynesian economics... because THAT would make sense. ish.






i ruined the joke sorry guys smh

@"but there are two ways of achieving this: maximizing individual liberty and giving everyone equal rights under the law: or to de-privilege the supposed "privileged" classes, which is a much more common assumption for people thinking of things as zero-sum.

and as for "on being 'different' without people judging you."

sorry, but when you want to restrict this, that's called thought policing. No thanks"

First, no-one is saying we should de-privilege people. The world isn't zero-sum, we don't need to de-privilege white people, we need to give everyone the same privileges.

Second, and i think you'll agree with me here, there are different kinds of difference. Those we are born with and those we choose. If you decide to change your appearance to go against social norms and then suffer judgement on the streets, that was your choice.

There is a difference between judging people for conditions of their birth and judging them based on their choices. I am clearly saying it is a privilege to spend your points on tatoos or goth-style clothing. I don't think we need to take away the privilege from people...

You said:
"1. freedom is only morally good, if it does not restrict another's freedom. this is just a baseline statement on freedom. my rights end where yours begin

2. fear is subjective. some people are more naturally fearful. this is no fault of anyone else, it could be hormonal and entirely natural.

3. fear is unsubsidizable. there is nothing i as an individual can DO to make you less afraid. the rapists and murderers that you fear, are not me. you do not get to generalize me in with them, simply because i have a penis. that is bigotry"

@1, I presume you are not saying that the freedom from fear (of sexual assault) would be infringing on the rights of rapists?

@2, Subjective or not, there it is. Objectively there is a higher rate of sexual assault.

@3, Didn't say it was something you personally had to fix. But it is something you can acknowledge. That you have this male privilege, I didn't say your were responcible for fixing everyone else's life. But you can listen to the people who are less privileged and empathize.

And i think the world would be a bit better off if the powerful and privileged empathized more with those without.

@"if we're free, we're free, with all of our rights and liberties. meanwhile minorities are not free, with all of their rights and liberties.

if this is your argument: PRIVILEGE IS THE WRONG WORD."

it isn't me who chose the word... so don't bother telling me that.

@'
"The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities."
- Ayn Rand'

What rights did i suggest you should remove from individuals.

I'm claiming that all people should be treated equally. But they aren't.
You are an individual, but strangers don't know you individually, in a small village where everyone knew each other, then we could treat people based on entirely on the content of their character. The Amish can get away with it, you don't need a police force when you can enforce behavioural norms via peer pressure. But in a city of millions, with state institutions dealing with hundreds of individuals per day, we don't have the time or energy.

Humans naturally make compromises in their thinking, they take shortcuts, they treat people based on stereotypes. And it is necessary to do something to successfully live in a culture with cities populated by millions of humans.

I fear that Any Rand's philosophy is bollixs. Sounds nice, but ignores the reality of our modern culture. How random people on the street treat you, how potential employers treat you, both will depends on whether they know you from family connections and friends, entirely possible in a small town and not in a big city.

Networking in your chosen industry is important, so people get to know you; but if you're an outsider trying to break in you suffer from discrimination based on things like the colour of your skin. And if you can't get your foot in the door, if all the opportunities go to people already connected to the privileged friends of the powerful, you end up with: "having been to the Emmys a couple times — you look around that room and you see the whitest fucking room in the history of time. Its just unbelievably white."

@"does that sound like a societal privilege for whites? no.

because at the end of the day: GENERALIZING IS BAD.

treat people like individuals"

At the end of the day, one individual director choosing to give someone else a chance for a change, is great. It increases diversity, it helps undo the damage of our past. The cultures which reinforce this kind of privilege.

If black kids see more black people on tv, they are more likely to aspire to work hard and become tv stars. Or if they see them portraying doctors, to work hard on becoming a doctor... this kind of representation in the media is vitally important. And as a white person, you may not have noticed how important it is because you've always been represented. Whether it was looking at the person in the office of the president, or the news man, or hundreds of other roles which people look up to, there has always been someone who looks like you, who you can identify with.

And it isn't my place to tell you this, but you can easily go out and find PoC talking about it. People who have experienced growing up in america without feeling represented in the media. Personally, i remember being upset as a child because there were no super heroes with red hair. I don't know what it feels like growing up in America, so it isn't my place to try and explain it to you... but if you are willing to do *something* go out and read some black authors talking about it. Listen to some black youtubers, you have internet access, use it and try to empathize with a group of people who didn't grow up with the same privilege you did.

Sorry, that was all @ JY.

Hope i did some justice to your post.

On Webdip: "secondly, there's very little evidence of white privilege."

Also today in America: http://www.rawstory.com/2017/09/new-hampshire-police-refuse-to-discuss-apparent-lynching-of-8-year-old-biracial-boy/amp/

Individual murders are irrelevant. I'd be more concerned if biracial folks were facing a genocide equivalent to the ones faced by white people.

How is the lynching of this boy related to white privilege though? Being a disgusting individual is not restricted by race, is it?

To liberals it is, they claim to judge by character but they don't, they judge on gender and race. They demand corporations have female chairs, even if there are none qualified to serve the position. Remeber those Oscars with 0 black actors? Maybe its because there wasn't any Oscar worthy performances. But to liberals, its obviously racism.

But when a liberal does a terrible act, the double standards wheel starts spinning and claim hes a disgusting individual.

Liberals are the queens/kings/whatever else they can come up with of hypocrisy and double standards. Conservatives do it to but not nearly as much as liberals.

@" I'd be more concerned if biracial folks were facing a genocide equivalent to the ones faced by white people."

Who has been telling you there is a genocide facing white people?

@"How is the lynching of this boy related to white privilege though? "

When i say, 'it is a privilege to walk down the street without having to fear for...' - and the reply is, 'oh no, white people don't have any privilege'

Then someone is getting lynched. They clearly don't have the ability to walk down the street without fear of what will happen to them.

If you can walk outside of your home without fear of lynching, you are privileged.

@"Maybe its because there wasn't any Oscar worthy performances. But to liberals, its obviously racism."

Are you an idiot? Maybe there were no Oscar worthy performances, and there never will be if the institutions continue to refuse to hire black actors, or produce films with roles for black actors. And the racism is in the history and culture, which you conveniently ignore.

Do you deny the white genocides in Zimbabwe and South Africa, Orathaic?

CroakandDagger: "Individual murders are irrelevant."

Yeah, ok. Fuck this guy. Muting.

If we assume that a hastily googled statistic of "a murder a minute" to be correct, then upwards of 1400 people are murdered every day.

Sorry if I can't be bothered to spend a week crying about every one, Jeff.

@ ND
https://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2017/09/inequality-opportunity?fsrc=scn/fb/te/bl/ed/

@orathaic

everything i'm responding to, is what i have contention with

"At the end of the day, one individual director choosing to give someone else a chance for a change, is great."

so why is "whitewashing" considered bad?


"It increases diversity, it helps undo the damage of our past."

so the only way to repair past damages, is to discriminate currently? that sounds awfully like... a zero-sum world view


"The cultures which reinforce this kind of privilege."

once again, i've yet to see a single homogenous culture reinforce white privilege. America has many different social stratospheres. if i go to Harlem or to a DNC convention, you won't find much white privilege there. this feels like an unfair generalization of ALL of america... and you also haven't provided any evidence beyond anecdotes.



"If black kids see more black people on tv, they are more likely to aspire to work hard and become tv stars. Or if they see them portraying doctors, to work hard on becoming a doctor... this kind of representation in the media is vitally important."

1. it's the TV station's right to do as they please. i have no problem on that account

2. why is it when a traditionally male or white role goes to a female or minority it's diversification, whereas whenever a white person takes over a minority role, it's considered whitewashing? why is meritocracy so abject compared to diversity?

3. i feel like minority groups are able to become great things, without having ideas spoon fed to them by media. yes culture influences us, but we've had decades without the internet of massive cable networks, in which many black men have grown up: Barack Obama being one of them.

4. there's actually evidence that some minority groups, especially homosexuals, are overrepresented in television. as for professions such as medical personnel, many of these TV shows are also overrepresented in minorities as well compared not only to the human population of america, but also to the number of actors in the labor force.



"And as a white person, you may not have noticed how important it is because you've always been represented. Whether it was looking at the person in the office of the president, or the news man, or hundreds of other roles which people look up to, there has always been someone who looks like you, who you can identify with."

this is where i start to get mad. i don't feel "represented" because some white guy is on my TV screen. if i see Bush on TV when he was President: HE DOES NOT REPRESENT ME! but if you only look at skin color: which is what YOU are doing, then you would come to that conclusion.

stop treating me as part of some racial class. my skin color is white, but that tells you NOTHING about who i am as a person. to blame otherwise is unadulterated racism.



"And it isn't my place to tell you this, but you can easily go out and find PoC talking about it. People who have experienced growing up in america without feeling represented in the media."

there's also a problem here with proportionality, should a disabled black transgender person be proportionally represented, or should we up the numbers a bit? As far as proportional representation goes, we're either approaching equilibrium on some groups, or we've pushed way past it in others.


"Personally, i remember being upset as a child because there were no super heroes with red hair."

Poison ivy, bat girl, Mystique, Rorschach... but even then, only 2% of the population has red hair.

what it sounds like is you don't want to be accurately represented... it sounds like you want EXTRA representation. do you know what that's called? a privilege.



"I don't know what it feels like growing up in America, so it isn't my place to try and explain it to you... but if you are willing to do *something* go out and read some black authors talking about it. Listen to some black youtubers, you have internet access, use it and try to empathize with a group of people who didn't grow up with the same privilege you did."


that is racist.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ndvpZZpn-eU

Larry Elder is black, let's listen to him. what? he doesn't fit your narrative? how about Thomas Sowell. what? another black person who dislikes the idea of white privilege? heresy!

it's racist, because you're assuming that if i go on youtube and listen to a black person, they'll tell me about not having privileges, ones that i always had.

black people are people. people have minds of their own. you'll get MANY different opinions from black men and women in this country.

stop pretending like all black people uniformly confirm with your beliefs. stop grouping people into racial classes.

identifying me as white, and defacto associating me with other whites, it's disgusting. Hitler was white, do i have some natural kinship with him? What the fuck do you think my skin color matters for? If some racist prefers me over a black person because HE is racist, that's not my fault, and if some racist prefers a black person over me because HE is racist, that's not the black person's fault either.

i don't have to apologize for racist individuals liking some biological fact about me, and i condemn it forthright. but YOU doing the same thing to me is making me mad. stop thinking in terms of skin color, and denounce all who do

@DO

i've read that article, it's a fair analysis of our current society.

but do you know what else is interesting, there is a direct correlation between economic freedom, upward mobility, gap per capita, a negative correlation with poverty rates, unemployment rates, and income inequality

https://www.flickr.com/photos/shanedk/sets/72157646459874723/

so maybe more freedom is good, less regulation... i'm glad to see you're accept some basic libertarianism.




@Orathaic

I forgot these
I said:
"1. freedom is only morally good, if it does not restrict another's freedom. this is just a baseline statement on freedom. my rights end where yours begin

2. fear is subjective. some people are more naturally fearful. this is no fault of anyone else, it could be hormonal and entirely natural.

3. fear is unsubsidizable. there is nothing i as an individual can DO to make you less afraid. the rapists and murderers that you fear, are not me. you do not get to generalize me in with them, simply because i have a penis. that is bigotry"



You responded:
@1, I presume you are not saying that the freedom from fear (of sexual assault) would be infringing on the rights of rapists?

@2, Subjective or not, there it is. Objectively there is a higher rate of sexual assault.

@3, Didn't say it was something you personally had to fix. But it is something you can acknowledge. That you have this male privilege, I didn't say your were responcible for fixing everyone else's life. But you can listen to the people who are less privileged and empathize.



1. my god you're daft. the rapist is infringing on your life and liberty as defined by the constitution and law. you cannot do that. i'm not being morally subjective, there are clear moral guidelines set out in the constitution, and you are free to act within those bounds. stepping out of those bounds, is where you end up invading on someone else's right to life of liberty.

2. freedom from fear is vague, and you cannot legislate shit. do you want me to feel for people who are afraid? what the HELL is that going to do for them? we need cultural change, and people who are already morally sound crying a bit extra isn't going to solve anything. we need to address the factors that cause crime: single motherhood, poverty, etc.

3. i do listen and empathize, but saying male PRIVILEGE is assuming i'm gaining something extra. change your terminology. i won't budge on this point.

furthermore, i find it hard to believe that the entire democrat platform when Hillary and Bernie were talking about privileged classes, was merely one of "just feel for them more." SUUUURREE. They would have pushed discriminatory legislation under that guise. YOU may not support it, but that's been a key tool of the left in politics for quite a while now. pretend it's not is ludicrous

Orathaic, stop. One bi-racial kid gets a rope tied around his neck, which is awful, but you want to make it like its an epidemic. Care to post anymore lynchings to back up your outrageous claim that "being able to walk down the road without fear of being lynched" is legit?

JY, those are some serious bullshit charts. What is an "Economic Freedom Score"? What metrics go into that black box of baloney?

@Stressedlines: Apparently you have no idea how *TERRORISM* is supposed to work.

Lynching was a terrible thing back in 1870-1930s but it isn't Jim Crow anymore people. It's 2017.

@""At the end of the day, one individual director choosing to give someone else a chance for a change, is great."

so why is "whitewashing" considered bad?


"It increases diversity, it helps undo the damage of our past."

so the only way to repair past damages, is to discriminate currently? that sounds awfully like... a zero-sum world view
"

No, there is a difference between 'discriminating currently' - which is what gives us hundreds of white actors, and stopping the current discrimination, which would gives us more diversity.

I didn't say we should have positive discrimination, i said we should have diversity.

Not repeating the mistakes of the past. Not repeating the mistakes of the past. Not repeating the mistakes of the past.

@"3. i feel like minority groups are able to become great things, without having ideas spoon fed to them by media. yes culture influences us, but we've had decades without the internet of massive cable networks, in which many black men have grown up: Barack Obama being one of them."

Entirely true, we ARE influenced by our culture, and we can achieve things despite these influences.

That doesn't mean it isn't harder to achieve if you've got no role models. That doesn't mean feeling represented in the media is necessary. But it is a privilege which more people should have.

As to your comments on white-washing. When you start out with - 100% of Oscar nominees and parts of your community say 'we should try to represent people better'; but the responce is 'there aren't any good roles for X, Y, and Z.'

Then you come up with a (to take a recent example) adaptation of a Japanese anime, and choose to cast a white woman instead of an Asian/Japanese-American (who have more difficult finding work, because 'there are no roles'). Is this the meritocracy you seem to crave?

Saying we want diversity of roles, and then seeing white women cast in roles which were of asian characters is just the first problem again.

There were not non-white people at the Awards. The casting directors said it was because there are no roles for non-white actors. They found a role, and 'adapted' it...

@"4. there's actually evidence that some minority groups, especially homosexuals, are overrepresented in television. "

if you happen to grow up without any role models life can be harder. If you happen to be gay and never see a story involving the (gay) main character discovering they like a person, and how they deal with it. Then you have no narrative written for when you personally first experience this.

If you are straight, you have hundreds of these kinds of narratives.

Now not talking about employment here. We aren't saying the gay actors need work and should be fairly represented. We're saying that it is a privilege to have characters you can identify with.

Even if you go 'that story isn't me, i'm more like Chandler than Joey' as a het guy you've got like three narratives to look at and choose from within on 90s TV show.

This is a privilege - in that there is no right to have yourself represented on tv. It isn't the end of the world, this one little thing doesn't stop someone becoming president. Barrack Obama is a great sign that times, they are a changing. But it costs you very little to acknowledge that there are many little things which may make your life easier. It doesn't mean your life is easy by any means.

Even the wealthiest most successful white man can die from cancer (RIP Steve Jobs). So there are many things which equalize us.

@"As far as proportional representation goes, we're either approaching equilibrium on some groups, or we've pushed way past it in others."

I didn't prescribe any solutions to the issue of representation.

The separate issue of employment - where 'there are no roles for X' is unrelated to the issue of role models.

I entirely think we can promote role models outside of TV and movies. You can have a black trans kid visit older black trans adults who are willing to talk to them about life. Or come into their classroom and talk about what success looks like for them.

There are many ways apart from film and TV, and i'm not trying to prescribe what is the perfect a solution, because i don't know what that would look like.

@""Personally, i remember being upset as a child because there were no super heroes with red hair."

Poison ivy, bat girl, Mystique, Rorschach... but even then, only 2% of the population has red hair.

what it sounds like is you don't want to be accurately represented... it sounds like you want EXTRA representation. do you know what that's called? a privilege.
"

Ok, Rorschach didn't have a tv show when i was growing up. Poison ivy, bat girl and mystique (with dyed hair) weren't men, i don't think i'd have identified with them. But i never said i want extra representation. I said i was upset.

I felt that heroes who i wanted to be like were not like me. It was upsetting. Again, i didn't prescribe a solution. I proposed that you read some people who have experienced far worse than i have...

@"3. i do listen and empathize, but saying male PRIVILEGE is assuming i'm gaining something extra. change your terminology. i won't budge on this point."

Terminology is kinda useful for understanding. This is the terminology used by people discussing the ideas. I'm not going to change the word privilege because you don't like it.

The extra thing you are getting, in this one example, was not being afraid. I didn't say you had to give that up, I did say your life is a little bit easier* for it. That's it.

*i didn't say, but i hope i implied, your life is less stressed, less busy worrying about your safety and more time to spend thinking about other things.

The extreme example would be never being able to leave the house for fear that your life was endangered. That would infringe greatly on your rights.

Now if that is a personal subjective experience and your life isn't actually endangered, then you need psychological help. Or if it is an entirely accurate picture, then you need to get the hell out of that unsafe country... (i'm not saying you should have a right to either of these things, i'm saying that not needing them is a privilege).

---

Any given narrative about white privilege, is just that, one perspective. In that it holds value it is in how it allows us see the perspective of others. There is not requirement for it to be perfect, or agreed upon by everyone, for it to hold value.

But most white people seem to attack it because they feel like it attacks them personally.

People like to attribute their success to their innate skill and blame their failures on the system (see: http://planetsave.com/2013/12/23/a-rigged-game-of-monopoly-reveals-how-feeling-wealthy-changes-our-behavior-ted-video/ ). So if you take a group of people who think they are responcible for being wealthier (or insert your own criteria here) than the average person, and you go around telling them that they 'have white privilege' - or course they'll come up with some rationalization to reject the white privilege narrative.

But no narrative is perfect, no narrative can perfectly encompass the complexity of reality. So it can merely illustrate one aspect. You can use the idea of white privilege and apply it to all kind of privileges, to see that being able-bodied really fucking rocks and makes your life easier... and this will raise the question 'what can i do to make life a bit easier to people who aren't able-bodied' - which is a rather difficult question, and again i'm not the one to answer it. But i think it is pretty clear that we all take for granted being able-bodied (and healthy) until we're not...

---

@""being able to walk down the road without fear of being lynched" is legit?"

You know, it only took one 9/11 attack to change every american (i know) in how much the feared terrorist attack.

So why don't you fuck off?

---

@JY i did look at your charts, it is a pity that i can't tell who the outliers are. Like is Washington DC was one, i could understand, it has a unique population distribution and other factors which make it an outlier. And (if it was a positive example) not every state in the US can be like the district of columbia. But there were some serious outliers, like which country has 80% unemployment? And how reliable is that figure? Sorry raising more questions than anything else.

jeff, I know quite well what terrorism is Ilived in the Middle east for many a years. Dont go down that road with me

How does that come into play with what he said? He plainly said that it is white privilege not to get lynched coming out your front door, which is clearly NOT the case

An 8 year old is lynched by a 14 year old, and now all people of his demographics can claim they fear lynching? seriously?

If anyone wonders why Trump won just direct them to some of these SJW webdip posts lol. People are sick of this BS SJW sick stuff.

I did find an article on zimbabwe (see: https://web.archive.org/web/20120916074945/http://www.genocidewatch.org/zimbabwe.html )

Polarization 5th of an 8 step process towards genocide. That is pretty bad. And it is shitty, the world is shitty and we should do things to make it less shitty.

If you live in Zimbabwe i recommend you take action of some kind. If you live in the US i recommend you look at how you can have the biggest impact. Which probably means looking at what issue people in your country face.

Trumps varies between stages 1-3 of genocide watch's list (see: http://www.genocidewatch.org/genocide/8stagesofgenocide.html ) that's pretty shitty.

@"An 8 year old is lynched by a 14 year old, and now all people of his demographics can claim they fear lynching? seriously?"


I never made that claim. But you are more likely to be lynched if you are black, thus you are less privileged. Sure lots of things vary state-by-state, local areas. But that doesn't change the fact.

If you were in Zimbabwe and white, you'd have more to fear from angry mobs going around threatening white farmers... And that would mean losing your privilege. If you move there that is a risk you have to take. Is this something you're now denying?

@"People are sick of this BS SJW sick stuff."

So you voted for a Racist, because you're sick of being told you have life easier than others? Is that correct?

9/11 killed over 3000 people, One 8 year old boy is not a slaughterhouse in the making. Sad, yes, but not a precursor to something more.

If now in the next year, dozens of blacks start getting lynched, I will take back my words.